切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华胸部外科电子杂志 ›› 2016, Vol. 03 ›› Issue (03) : 144 -150. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-8773.2016.03.04

所属专题: 文献

论著

单孔和多孔胸腔镜肺叶、肺段切除术多中心回顾性分析
吉春宇1, 项杨威1, 章雪飞1, 王喆歆1, 冯键1, 方文涛1,()   
  1. 1. 200030 上海交通大学附属胸科医院胸外科
  • 收稿日期:2016-07-15 出版日期:2016-08-28
  • 通信作者: 方文涛

Multi-center retrospective study of single-port and multi-port video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomic lobectomy and segmentectomy

Chunyu Ji1, Yangwei Xiang1, Xuefei Zhang1, Zhexin Wang1, Jian Feng1, Wentao Fang1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai 200030, China
  • Received:2016-07-15 Published:2016-08-28
  • Corresponding author: Wentao Fang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Fang Wentao, Email:
引用本文:

吉春宇, 项杨威, 章雪飞, 王喆歆, 冯键, 方文涛. 单孔和多孔胸腔镜肺叶、肺段切除术多中心回顾性分析[J]. 中华胸部外科电子杂志, 2016, 03(03): 144-150.

Chunyu Ji, Yangwei Xiang, Xuefei Zhang, Zhexin Wang, Jian Feng, Wentao Fang. Multi-center retrospective study of single-port and multi-port video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomic lobectomy and segmentectomy[J]. Chinese Journal of Thoracic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2016, 03(03): 144-150.

目的

分析和比较单孔和多孔胸腔镜在肺叶、肺段切除术的可行性及患者围手术期恢复上的差异。

方法

回顾性分析2013年至2014年在上海交通大学附属胸科医院、台湾国立大学附属医院、香港大学圣玛丽医院及深圳医院、韩国大学九老医院接受胸腔镜肺叶或者肺段切除的458例患者的临床资料。根据手术方式分为单孔胸腔镜组及多孔(包括2孔、3孔和4孔)胸腔镜组。比较两组患者在手术时间、术中出血、手术方式改变、淋巴结采集个数和组数、拔管时间、胸管引流量,以及术后住院时间、再入院发生率、术后并发症、围手术期病死率、术后疼痛评分上的差异。

结果

两组患者在淋巴结采集个数和组数、再入院发生率、术后并发症发生率、围手术期病死率及术后第3天的疼痛评分上差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。单孔组患者的手术时间、术中出血量高于多孔组(t=2.039,P=0.042;χ2=23.534,P<0.001)。单孔组患者在术后第1天和第2天的疼痛评分低于多孔组(χ2=9.959,P=0.002;χ2=11.971,P<0.0001)。

结论

单孔胸腔镜肺叶、肺段切除术安全、有效,较传统多孔法创伤小,疼痛更轻。

Objective

To assess the feasibility and perioperative outcomes of single-port and multi-port video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomic lobectomy and segmentectomy.

Methods

The clinical data of 458 patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomic lobectomy or segmentectomy in Shanghai Chest Hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University, Affiliated Hospital of National Taiwan University, University of HongKong Queen Mary Hospital, Shenzhen Hospital and Korea University Guro Hospital between 2013 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into single-port thoracoscopic group and multi-port(including 2-port, 3-port and 4-port) thoracoscopic group according to surgical approaches. The parameters of duration of operation, volume of blood loss during operation, conversion of surgical approach, number and stations of lymph nodes harvested, postoperative chest tube drainage time, volume of chest tube drainage, postoperative hospitalization time, incidence of hospital readmission, perioperative morbidity and mortality, and pain score within 3 days after operation were compared between two groups.

Results

There was no significant difference in the number and stations of lymph nodes harvested, incidence of hospital readmission, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and pain score on the third day after operation between two group(P>0.05). The duration of operation and volume of blood loss during operation in single-port group were significantly longer or larger than those in multi-port group(t=2.039, P=0.042; χ2=23.534, P<0.001) The pain scores on the first day and second day after operation in single-port group were significantly lower than those in multi-port group(χ2=9.959, P=0.002; χ2=11.971, P<0.0001)5).

Conclusions

Single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomic lobectomy and segmentectomy is a safe and feasible approach, which has less surgical trauma and postoperative pain than the traditional multiple-port approach.

表1 单孔组与多孔组肺叶、肺段切除患者的一般资料比较
表2 单孔组与多孔组患者术前诊断及TNM分期比较[例(%)]
表3 单孔组与多孔组患者手术情况及淋巴结采集情况比较[例(%)]
表4 单孔组与多孔组患者术后恢复及疼痛评分比较
表5 单孔组与多孔组患者术后病理及TNM分期比较
[1]
NaidooR,WindsorMN,GoldstrawP. Surgery in 2013 and beyond[J]. J Thorac Dis, 2013,5 (Suppl 5):S593-S606.
[2]
HiguchiM,YaginumaH,YonechiA, et al. Long-term outcomes after video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy versus lobectomy via open thoracotomy for clinical stage IA non-small cell lung cancer[J]. J Cardiothorac Surg,2014,9:88.
[3]
NwoguCE,D'CunhaJ,PangH, et al. VATS lobectomy has better perioperative outcomes than open lobectomy: CALGB 31001, an ancillary analysis of CALGB 140202 (Alliance) [J]. Ann Thorac Surg, 2015,99(2):399-405.
[4]
Gonzalez-RivasD. Single-Port Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy[J]. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg, 2010,12(3):514-515.
[5]
WangBY,LiuCY,HsuPK, et al. Single-incision versus multiple-incision thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy: a propensity-matched analysis[J]. Ann Surg, 2015,261(4):793-799.
[6]
TamuraM,ShimizuY,HashizumeY. Pain following thoracoscopic surgery: retrospective analysis between single-incision and three-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery[J]. J Cardiothorac Surg, 2013,8(1):1832-1833.
[7]
HiraiK,TakeuchiS,UsudaJ. Single-incision thoracoscopic surgery and conventional video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a retrospective comparative study of perioperative clinical outcomes[J]. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2016 49 (Suppl 1):i37-i41.
[8]
MuJW,GaoSG,QiX, et al. A matched comparison study of uniportal versus triportal thoracoscopic lobectomy and sublobectomy for early-stage nonsmall cell lung cancer[J].Chin Med J (Engl),2015,128(20):2731-2735.
[9]
RoccoG,Martin-UcarA,PasseraE. Uniportal VATS wedge pulmonary resections[J]. Ann Thorac Surg, 2004,77(2):726-728.
[10]
GonzalezrivasD. Single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomic segmentectomy and right upper lobectomy[J]. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2012,42(6):e169-171.
[11]
Gonzalez-RivasD,TorreMDL,FernandezR, et al. Video: Single-incision video-assisted thoracoscopic right pneumonectomy[J]. Surg Endosc, 2012,26(7):2078-2079.
[12]
Gonzalez-RivasD,FernandezR,FieiraE, et al. Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic bronchial sleeve lobectomy: first report[J]. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2013,145(6):1676-1677.
[13]
Gonzalez-RivasD,DelgadoM,FieiraE, et al. Double sleeve uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer[J]. Ann Cardiothorac Surg, 2014,3(2):E2-E2.
[14]
刘成武,刘伦旭. 单孔胸腔镜:微创肺癌切除的再次升华[J]. 中国肺癌杂志. 2014(7):527-530.
[15]
LiuC-C,ShihC-S,PennarunN, et al. Transition from a multiport technique to a single-port technique for lung cancer surgery: is lymph node dissection inferior using the single-port technique[J]? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg,2016,49(suppl 1):i64-i72.
[1] 刘嘉嘉, 王承华, 陈绪娇, 刘瑗玲, 王善钰, 屈海花, 张莉. 经阴道子宫-输卵管实时三维超声造影中患者疼痛发生情况及其影响因素分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 959-965.
[2] 董红华, 郭艮春, 江磊, 吴雪飞, 马飞翔, 李海凤. 骨科康复一体化模式在踝关节骨折快速康复中的应用[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 802-807.
[3] 吴畏, 吴永哲, 李宗倍, 崔宏力, 李华志, 许臣. 轻质大网孔补片腹腔镜下疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟疝的疗效及炎症因子的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 70-73.
[4] 徐金林, 陈征. 抗菌药物临床应用监测对腹股沟疝修补术预防用药及感染的影响[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 720-723.
[5] 代格格, 杨丽, 胡媛媛, 周文婷. 手术室综合干预在老年腹股沟疝患者中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 759-763.
[6] 王敏, 蒋家斌, 李茂新. 预警宣教联合个性化疼痛管理对腹股沟疝手术患者的影响[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 764-767.
[7] 王蕾, 王少华, 牛海珍, 尹腾飞. 儿童腹股沟疝围手术期风险预警干预[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 768-772.
[8] 朱青青, 卫贞祺. 腹股沟疝患者围手术期自我能效管理探讨[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 773-777.
[9] 王可, 范彬, 李多富, 刘奎. 两种疝囊残端处理方法在经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术中的疗效比较[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 692-696.
[10] 夏松, 姚嗣会, 汪勇刚. 经腹腹膜前与疝环充填式疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的对照研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 702-705.
[11] 朱迪, 欧阳钒, 杨丹, 华敏, 吴倩. 双轨护理在老年腹股沟疝无张力修补术围手术期的应用[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 630-634.
[12] 张汪, 徐淑英, 张爱华, 夏芬荣, 汪露. 手术室体温护理结合细节护理干预在老年腹股沟疝围手术期的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 635-638.
[13] 蓝冰, 王怀明, 王辉, 马波. 局部晚期结肠癌膀胱浸润的研究进展[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 505-511.
[14] 中华医学会骨科分会关节学组. 中国髋、膝关节置换日间手术围手术期管理专家共识[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(06): 321-332.
[15] 付强, 秦丽媛, 李全波. 神经病理性疼痛患者血清miR-15a水平及意义分析[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 293-298.
阅读次数
全文


摘要